US Politics Mega-thread - Page 9742

On January 20 2018 15:09 Introvert wrote:


Point is that it isn't a GOP based piece, which is apparently very hard for some to understand.

On January 20 2018 14:48 Doodsmack wrote:


The contents of the Nunes dossier are pretty much as presumptively false as the contents of the Steele dossier.

On January 20 2018 15:19 Leporello wrote:
As for the Nunes memo, Introvert/Danglars/Hannity/et-al don't actually want it released. That's not the point. Why release a "memo" written by a politician that contains talking-points one could easily argue?

Nunes is supposed to be recused from investigating Russian interference, to remind some of you. You're talking about an opinion-piece, that references highly-selective classified-material, from someone who has been officially declared as biased.

It's much more effective to be talked-about in obscure fashion while Russian-bots promote it on social-media. Let imaginations run-wild, with complete baselessness.

Look for the bad-faith approach to everything the GOP is doing lately, and you'll basically never be wrong.

On January 20 2018 15:30 Danglars wrote:

I’ll take the FISA application too. It’s primary source. Wait, I bet you don’t actually want that one released.

On January 20 2018 15:19 Leporello wrote:
As for the Nunes memo, Introvert/Danglars/Hannity/et-al don't actually want it released. That's not the point. Why release a "memo" written by a politician that contains talking-points one could easily argue?

Nunes is supposed to be recused from investigating Russian interference, to remind some of you. You're talking about an opinion-piece, that references highly-selective classified-material, from someone who has been officially declared as biased.

It's much more effective to be talked-about in obscure fashion while Russian-bots promote it on social-media. Let imaginations run-wild, with complete baselessness.

Look for the bad-faith approach to everything the GOP is doing lately, and you'll basically never be wrong.

On January 20 2018 16:10 Introvert wrote:


Actually I want it all released, and you didn't even ask me. Yet you still bitch about petty politics.

On January 20 2018 16:04 Leporello wrote:
Let's have some basic civics:

If the GOP wanted to outlaw abortion, through legislation or the Supreme Court, they could do it. Right now. How is abortion still so legal? Every Republican with an ounce of integrity, of which I sadly feel there are few, should be asking themselves that question. You have a conservative Supreme Court, and conservative legislation. Roe v Wade should be gone if Republicans actually mean even half of what they say. You don't need the Supreme Court, although it would suffice. But they could legislate it, instead. However, stopping "baby killing" is apparently very low-priority. Like, who cares. Trump spoke at a Pro-Life rally, recently. Did he tell them what was stopping him from stopping the "baby killing"? Because it seems like nothing would've prevented the GOP from at least trying to shutting abortion down. They just didn't care. Never brought it up. "Baby-killing". Doesn't that say it all?

If the GOP wanted to fund CHIP, they could do it. Right now. Or 4 months ago.

If the GOP wanted to fund a temporary provision for the military through the government shutdown, they could pass a provision, right now.

https://twitter.com/brianschatz/status/954599230441697281
https://twitter.com/mattwhouse/status/954599584063508486

They don't want these things. They want the talking-point. They don't want to outlaw abortion, they want you to vote for them to outlaw abortion. They only get those votes if there is abortion available to be outlawed, ergo, Republicans will never outlaw abortion. Republicans don't care about CHIP, they know the Democrats care about CHIP, so they expect to be given something for it. This is the GOP. It couldn't be much more obvious that they mean nothing of what they say.

Listening to McConnell's closing speeches, it just couldn't be clearer why this is happening. His approach to bipartisanship has never been anything more than to point fingers and nail himself to a feeble cross, all while excluding the opposition from every possible discussion. This stuff could fly during the Obama years, when the GOP was all comfortable having nothing more to do than point fingers. It's easy to be a sociopath when people aren't really paying attention.

But 2017 was GOP's year, and people are paying more attention than ever. The GOP passed major, Democratic-opposed legislation (but couldn't be bothered to even try to stop the "baby-killing", apparently). You just can't argue that. You can't say you cut taxes for billionaires, but the Dems stopped you from passing CHIP. The nonsense in that is too blatant.

On January 20 2018 16:04 Leporello wrote:
Let's have some basic civics:

If the GOP wanted to outlaw abortion, through legislation or the Supreme Court, they could do it. Right now.

On January 20 2018 16:12 Leporello wrote:


No, I assumed your position, which I deem to be in opposite of what you say.

On January 20 2018 16:39 Introvert wrote:


In light of the rest of your posting this makes perfect sense. I'm glad you just came out and admitted this isn't a good faith discussion, that makes responding (or not, anymore) so much easier.

On January 20 2018 16:39 Introvert wrote:


In light of the rest of your posting this makes perfect sense. I'm glad you just came out and admitted this isn't a good faith discussion, that makes responding (or not, anymore) so much easier.

On January 20 2018 16:54 Nebuchad wrote:


I don't know about you personally, but I certainly can't have a good faith discussion where I pretend that I believe the republican politicians are honest actors. That would be too much of a stretch for my beliefs. Following that it's hard for me to accept that you could defend them in such a way and be honest. I don't really believe that anybody can watch McConnell be all shocked and chagrined that the democrats are blocking CHIP and not have any reaction whatsoever regarding the fact that the reason why CHIP is blocked is specifically so that he can make that speech about how unbelievable it is that some people are so evil that they would block CHIP. I assume your mileage may vary.

Now I could lie and pretend that I believe everyone is saying exactly what they think, but that doesn't really fit with my understanding of rationality, or honesty.

On January 20 2018 16:59 Leporello wrote:


Please do ignore me like you ignore Trump's lack of tax-returns while you ask for "transparency". That'll be fine. It won't stop me from responding and pointing out your double-standards. + Show Spoiler + Just ignore it, yo.

SAN FRANCISCO (KPIX 5) — If your cellphone is stolen, what are the chance the police will go after the thief? Pretty slim right?

But, when Apple loses a phone, it can be a different story altogether.

On one recent morning, Rick Garcia and his wife Shannon Knuth woke up to a posse of San Francisco police officers at their front door.

“I peered through the peephole and I saw a police officer and a battering ram,” Garcia said.

“We heard ‘SFPD’ and ‘warrant,’ and I was like ‘what’s going on?’” Knuth remembers.

It felt like a nightmare yet it was real.

Garcia says that within seconds he was dragged into the hallway of his apartment complex, handcuffed, then whisked away to the Taraval Station.

“All my instincts to defend myself, defend my wife, defend my dog, needed to be supressed in order to have the best outcome,” said Rick.

Meanwhile Knuth, who had just got out of the shower, was ordered to sit on the couch.

“I was just wrapped up in a towel,” Knuth said.

Even more humiliating was what the officers did when she asked for clothes.

“One officer went into my closet and they chose an outfit they got a bra and a thong and some stretchy pants and handed it to me and said ‘will this do?’” Knuth said.

Just one thought was racing through her mind: “That they had the wrong person,” she said.

After rifling through the apartment Knuth says the officers finally told her what they were looking for: Her husband’s iPhone X.

According to the warrant, it was stolen but Knuth showed them the receipt which proved her husband bought it.

Once the officers realized their mistake they called the police station and a squad car brought Garcia home.

“They gathered their pry bar and their battering ram and they left,” he said.

So how could a mistake like that happen?

It’s still unclear but it turns out Garcia and Knuth bought the iPhone at an Apple store at Stonestown Galleria just a few weeks after 300 iPhone Xs were stolen from a UPS truck in the mall parking lot.

“It kind of boggles the mind the way San Francisco police handled this,” said Tom Burns.

Tom Burns is a security consultant and former police chief. “Obviously there was some mix up on the original theft from November. The police should have realized this and done more due diligence,” Burns said.

Starting with the suspect descriptions in the actual UPS heist.

“Mr. Garcia is about 5 feet, 120 pounds. The three suspects were very big and husky according to the police report. This was clearly an incident that should have just been a knock and talk, a couple detectives come to the door, knock on the door and they would have gathered the same info that they gathered after they put him in handcuffs and hauled him off to jail,” Burns said.

In a statement to KPIX, San Francisco police confirm “there was an individual detained, upon further investigation it was determined no criminal misconduct had occurred and the individual was released.” But they offered no comment on what led to the mistake.

Apple had no comment either — an insult to Rick and Shannon, who are major fans of the company’s products. Rick over the years bought the first iPhone, the first iPad and the first Apple Watch. “We want Apple to recognize how harmful this was to us,” he says.

As for heavy-handed tactics by the San Francisco police: “I am not surprised. This has been their typical M.O. here in San Francisco,” Garcia said.

Garcia is still recovering from a wrist injury he received from the handcuffs. It’s affecting his design work as an architect for a prominent local firm — a firm that, ironically, does a lot of contract work for Apple.

“I realize how dangerous the situation was. If I had reacted differently it could have had a horrible outcome. I had dreams where I did react differently,” Garcia said.

He adds he didn’t even know what he was being accused of until the squad car brought him back home because the police wouldn’t tell him. And he says no one ever read him his rights.

On January 20 2018 16:04 Leporello wrote:
Let's have some basic civics:

If the GOP wanted to outlaw abortion, through legislation or the Supreme Court, they could do it. Right now. How is abortion still so legal? Every Republican with an ounce of integrity, of which I sadly feel there are few, should be asking themselves that question. You have a conservative Supreme Court, and conservative legislation. Roe v Wade should be gone if Republicans actually mean even half of what they say. You don't need the Supreme Court, although it would suffice. But they could legislate it, instead. However, stopping "baby killing" is apparently very low-priority. Like, who cares. Trump spoke at a Pro-Life rally, recently. Did he tell them what was stopping him from stopping the "baby killing"? Because it seems like nothing would've prevented the GOP from at least trying to shutting abortion down. They just didn't care. Never brought it up. "Baby-killing". Doesn't that say it all?